cygnosis
hmm. I see. By plugging in only one side you're creating a 120v cattle prod. Yeah, that would be hazardous.
Explain why, please. I'm not an electrician, but as I understand it, when you install an electrical socket the same three wires in the romex cable provide power for both plugs. Effectively each of the holes in the top plug is bonded to the same hole in the bottom plug. So why would connecting them with an external wire cause a problem? Even if two outlets are right next to each other, and one has reversed polarity, you'd just be connecting neutral to neutral and hot to hot. I don't understand why it's a fire hazard.
edit: last two sentences are wrong. If one plug has reversed polarity and one doesn't you'd be connecting two wires from hot to neutral, and that would probably just blow a fuse.
I had a few tomato plants do well in the garden this year. With a pretty good amount of San Marzano, Cherry, and Early Girl tomatoes, juicing and reducing was the only practical way to deal with them. To do it efficiently I like to use a tomato juicer (mine looks something like this). I put the juice in a pot on the stove for an hour or two to reduce it to a sauce. It takes a little time, but if you have a bunch of ripe tomatoes you can make a banger of a sauce. Throw in some Italian herbs, salt, and a few hot pepper flakes and you've got my favorite sauce. I've been eating that on ravioli for a few weeks now and I think it's great: sweet (from the cherry tomatoes) and full of flavor.
As far as efficiency goes, it does take some energy if you just evaporate the watery part on the stove. You could also let the water separate out from the tomatoes and just drain it off. That should make the reduction much faster.
Honestly, I just feel sorry for the little one. Life is unfair enough, but to get such a shitty start? I mean, these very early life experiences can set the tone for your whole life. Hopefully he gets placed with a family who can help him through that.
It's a way to infantilize and ridicule the red team candidates that's really hard for them to dismiss. They want to be perceived as strong, noble, divinely-appointed saviors of the morality of the country. Using 'weird' as an attack takes the wind out of their sails. And the only effective way to counter it is to embrace and transcend it, something the red team is incapable of doing.
From an article in WP
A central pillar of Trump’s campaign is the idea that liberals are perverted misfits who want to tear down American values. ... [Trump supporters] were strong; libs were weak. They were right; libs were wrong....
“Weird” intrudes on that narrative. It doesn’t entirely upend it, but it does plant a seed of doubt. What if, instead of being admired or feared, they are instead being laughed at? What if, instead of edgelords, they are actually just the kids in the corner eating glue off their hands?
also
“He’s just a strange, weird dude,” newly-named vice presidential nominee Tim Walz (D) told an assembled group of 60,000 “White Dudes for Harris” at an online fundraiser last week. The Minnesota governor has been, if not the inventor of this tactic, its most skilled proponent.
May every shirt you wear have an itchy tag you can't remove.
(attempting to answer the question instead of shaming the questioner)
It might have helped solve the problem if we did it 50 or 60 years ago, along with global EMP strikes to disable all the vehicles and industrial equipment, and a global commitment to return to an agrarian low-energy lifestyle. And if you prioritized the most highly industrialized cities that produce the greatest carbon per capita. But the sad truth is that, right now, it's already too late. We have already released so much carbon into the atmosphere that we are more or less guaranteed to see 4 degrees C above pre-industrial. And if you aren't already retired you will probably see it in your lifetime. Along the way that triggers a series of cascading feedback loops which, all-told, will likely take the planet to about 10C above pre-industrial. We continue to release something like 40 billion metric tons per year. And the best CCS facility we have, in Iceland, can sequester about 4,000 tons per year. We are racing toward the cliff with the throttle at full speed and no corrupt government scientist is going to take away my truck or make me eat bugs.
And questions about who should die, who should be killed, and such don't even really matter now. They sound immoral, but if the projections are right it looks like all of us who aren't already old are going to die from climate change anyways. So pontificating on things that aren't ever going to happen is just academic onanism.
Literally? No. We're all subject to the same laws of physics.
Perceptual reality? World view? Yes. I only know one person in real life and not online (my wife) who shares some of my views of reality. For instance, I am a doomer. I am convinced we are well into the sixth, and by all accounts the most devastating, mass extinction. Humans are clever, but we depend on a stable environment for our food. That stable environment is turning into a series of alternating droughts, floods, fires, blizzards, and other extreme weather events. TBH, I'd be surprised if our species lasts to the end of the century. Hanson figures that, after feedbacks, we are on track for 10c of warming. That's apocalyptic. And every time scientists talk about it you hear words like 'faster than expected'. We are doing exactly nothing to prevent it, and are, in fact, accelerating the collapse by increasing our consumption, population, pollution, and environmental destruction. COP has been talking about it for so long (almost 30 years) that we've missed the boat. We are well past the point where we could stop it. We're in the 'find out' stage now.
Yet people keep having kids and planning for the future like everything is going to be just fine. Can you not see what's happening? When's the last time you scraped bugs off your car windshield? They're all dying out. The biosphere is collapsing around us. But sure, keep contributing to your 401K. Keep talking about how the 'fertility crisis' is the big issue. Keep thinking that somehow windmills and recycling are going to save the planet. Tell me more about how voting is going to fix the problem. I feel like Kate Dibiasky saying we're all going to die while everyone around me wants to talk about their PTA, the latest social issue, or which politician they like.
(deep breath)
Yes. I do feel like my perception of reality is different than most people I know. I don't know most of humanity so I can't really say, but it sure seems like it.
It wouldn't delay your death. But it would make it more pleasant. You would most likely pass out from low blood pressure pretty quickly and then you wouldn't have to worry about starving any more.
For real. Who would have guessed the most realistic prediction from Star Trek was talking directly to the computer. Whereas the least realistic one is that a post-scarcity society would benefit average people.